Raonic v Federer - McEnroe feels his protege is ready to get to a Slam Final. On ESPN, he stated that emphatically. Federer looks hungry, but Cilic feels Federer was missing shots that he did not miss in his heyday.

Berdych v Murray - Murray should find this a bit easier than his QF v Tsonga. Drop shots and good defense should also help. Baseline play may not get him much leverage with Berdych.

Thanks Auto, appreciated. The forum seems not the same since the fallout, the lower modding is better but clearly a mark has been left. We'll see if people slowly return.Lord knows how Berdych got this far...he's limited/wooden in game and mind and yet here he is...hard to believe. The only area he's better than Murray is a more attractive partner. Fed really missed his chance as I said earlier at 40-A at 5-6 in the 4th, going back to Raonic rather than easy FH put away to then maybe take him to the TB will haunt him tonight. Suspect that was Fed's last big act in tennis also.

Grass more than any other surface is about the guys with best movement (or absolute huge weapons...Goran, Raonic, etc).Berdych is wooden looking vs Murray and his weapons aren't as big as 5-6 years ago, too predictable also...doesn't say much for the draw/field/state of tennis that he got this far tbh.

lydian wrote:Thanks Auto, appreciated. The forum seems not the same since the fallout, the lower modding is better but clearly a mark has been left. We'll see if people slowly return.

...................................

Suspect that was Fed's last big act in tennis also.

Agreed re the forum in general.

Specifically re Fed : you could well be right. Time alone will tell of course.

It could easily have been so so different had he been able to convert one or more of the many, many opportunities he fashioned during the match and take it into a decider. Even had he crashed out in five, at least he would have gone down fighting rather than with such a sense of deflation, disappointment and wasted chances.

Then again, it was more than could be expected given the context when he came in on day one. And if it IS his "last big act" ...... well, there will be no shortage of lasting golden memories for the years ahead.

Just one hold away and it's looking like this may end up Andy's most straightforward SF win. From memory, I can't recall him ever winning in straights before. 4 sets tends to be the norm, but I've probably forgotten one somewhere along the line. Comfortable wins are less memorable after all.

Easy win for Murray. To be honest, as soon as the draw was announced, he looked a nailed-on certainty for the final. Only Kyrgios looked a genuine threat and that came to naught. Has to be favourite for the final, but, if Milos hits his spots on serve, he will definitely have more than a fighting chance.

I think John McEnroe and Carlos Moya who are both in Raonic coaching team will be able to put Roanic in a good place mentally. I think Murray will have to win the match rather than hoping for Raonic to lose it.

Roger Federer did well to last to the fifth set in the semi-final of the Wimbledon tournament following the injuries he has had this year. Following his fall in the fifth set he needed a walking stick to get around the court. He needs rest and time to recover, but he turns 35 this August and top level elite tennis may be slipping away from him.

If Murray wins Wimbledon this year - everyone will say that just proves the Lendl effect. But this seasons Wimbledon may be the sign of things to come.

Interesting that Murray has probably had a more gruelling 2016 season than Djokovic - but many commentators explained Djokovic's defeat to Querrey as being the result of not having physically gotten over the efforts he put into Roland Garros.

Last edited by Nore Staat on Fri 08 Jul 2016, 7:10 pm; edited 1 time in total

Andy seems so relaxed. You'd think he'd be more excited, but I guess the real work is still to do. 3 slam finals in a row is mighty impressive, even if the men's tour is going through a slightly fallow patch. The reality is that throughout his career he's been incredibly dominant against everyone outside the big 4. On that basis, you have to say the final is his to lose.

Perhaps it was all about the last chance saloon. Having got within touching distance of yet another Wimbledon Final, he may well be telling himself that he won't get this close again.

Certainly, I don't ever recall seeing him so deflated in a post-match presser. He looked lower even than after tough losses in his prime. But of course in his prime, he could at least draw comfort from the self-confidence that the next Slam was there waiting.

Then again ..... he knows better than anyone that he came into this without a 'normal' amount of match practice. When the dust has settled, it's possible that he can re-focus, remind himself how well he did to make the SF, get back to full strength (?) and find fresh motivation. And maybe, just maybe, put himself in contention again next year. He would likely need a favourable draw.

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:Only two unforced errors from Fed? I only caught the second half of the set and could have sworn there were more than two BH shanks.

Wimbledon calculates UEs differently to other tourneys - that's why every match has so few UEs at W compared to other tourneys.

Have you got a source that discussed it online, or was this something you heard in TV commentary or something?

He is right, Wimbeldon scorekeepers are unbelievably British and polite and basically will call things forced errors that are in no way forced. In almost every other tournament for example any netted second serve return that should be made is an UE, which it should be. At Wimbeldon they almost never score any return miss no matter how bad as an UE. Notoriously friendly scorekeepers who run up huge Winners to Errors ratios even in comparison to other fast court slams. They are pretty notorious over the generations for that and I actually think they know and like that reputation.

Yup, pretty much as Socal explained. I have read it somewhere but that was ages ago. But it's the reason why you'll lots of W matches with playing having UEs in just single digits which is unheard of over three sets.

Wimbledon only employs guys who are rated 3.1 or above (basically high county standard) to measure the stats, so as to ensure that they are as accurate as possible. Generally, they are much better than the other slams, as they actually understand what's unforced. Of course, the courts are also significantly quicker than the other slams. Those two factors combined lead to big differences from the other slams.

Nore Staat wrote:I still don't think Murray has been pushed so far in this tournament.

Isn't that testament to how good Andy has been so far? To me, he's just beaten three players, who would all have given Roger as much trouble as Raonic did

The 'easy' draw, actually wasn't that easy. He met the one consistent Top 90 player, to actually have reached a quarter here. And then the always dangerous Nasty Nick (he freely admits to have lost his resolve due to Murray's play) followed by the version of Tsonga that actually reminds you that he could be the best player never to win a slam and the pretty consistent Berdych

Whatever way you cut it, the Berdych of 2016 was a favourable draw for the semis, but agree that Murray's draw for the other rounds was probably a shade tougher than Fed's, if anything. I think Fed made heavy work of Cilic and made him seem a more dangerous proposition than he really was.

Lags, I really feel Fed knows this was his golden chance to get out at the top like Sampras did. He knew he had a great chance vs Murray had he come through and tbh he really should have come through 3-1 today...he was the better player in the 4th but made silly decisions at critical moments, and unusually DF'ed too. Then he ran out of gas in the 5th. He's a better player than Raonic, we all know that and he knows that...but he just isn't the player he was anymore and that I'm sure is very frustrating for him, knowing his best days are firmly behind him.

I desperately wanted him to win today and felt his pain at not closing the 4th. It's been a great ride and getting this far at ~35 in modern era is still amazing in itself. However, I do believe he's a spent force at slams after this USO. I think he knows Father Time is knocking, hence the deflation...

Andy hasn't allowed himself to be pushed him very often. And ....whenever it has happened (notably v Tsonga), he has stayed calm, steely resolve, come back strongly - and in short has ended up bossing every match.

Lags, I really feel Fed knows this was his golden chance to get out at the top like Sampras did. He knew he had a great chance vs Murray had he come through and tbh he really should have come through 3-1 today...he was the better player in the 4th but made silly decisions at critical moments, and unusually DF'ed too. Then he ran out of gas in the 5th. He's a better player than Raonic, we all know that and he knows that...but he just isn't the player he was anymore and that I'm sure is very frustrating for him, knowing his best days are firmly behind him.

I desperately wanted him to win today and felt his pain at not closing the 4th. It's been a great ride and getting this far at ~35 in modern era is still amazing in itself. However, I do believe he's a spent force at slams after this USO. I think he knows Father Time is knocking, hence the deflation...

Spot on. Half fit or not, fact is he's been Andy's main nemesis at the slams and that has to have an affect

I still think Andy would have beaten him, simply because Rogers movement is so obviously limited

Haddie-nuff wrote:So this is it then.. THE ROBOTIC RAONIC defeats the veteran to find a place in the final against what could be the BIRDBRAIN BERDYCH.. wow!! what a fantastic Wimbledon one which will forever stay in my memory.

Andy for Christmas sake pleeeeeeeeeeeeez save the Wimbers Title

What a boring Wimbledon that has turned out to be

Well I certainly agree that a Raonic v Berdych Final would be the worst possible news for the ticket touts (outlawed anyway these days ....?) - although now looking a near-certainty for Murray to come through here, so it won't come to pass.

But here's the thing : if Raonic truly is as metronomic/robotic/limited as you (and, in fairness, many others) continue to claim, then how come nobody has stopped him so far in six previous rounds ...??

Frankly lags I wish I could answer that but I cant only to ask what the hell else to we have when you have young ones like Tomic and Kyrgios failing to make any sort of commitment. True he has improved considerably but he still fails to light my fire.. he could do with a charisma transplant it might help to convince me. But I do not see him as the saviour of tennis

And if - big IF, I know - he were to take down Andy on Sunday, would you then say that he does - or does not - deserve to be Wimbledon Champion, and given due credit ......even though you may not actually enjoy watching his brand of tennis ......

Agree B, Murray was firm fave...too many miles on Feds clock these days, he'd have had to play out of his skin to beat an energised Murray in the F. But alas, time waits for no-one, not even the mighty Fed. It's actually a shame seeing former greats start losing to guys they beat routinely in their former days...Fed had a 9-2 record over Raonic before today, so it's a bitter pill to swallow losing to a former relative whipping boy. Anyway, I don't enjoy watching Raonic play so unlikely to watch the final...I think Murray is pretty nailed on to win anyway, he can neutralise the serve and then his superior movement will cause Milos problems in the ralleys. Feels like tennis is entering a different phase now...the loss today more than another for Fed or Nadal felt like a formal handing over of the baton to the younger guys.

Haddie-nuff wrote:So this is it then.. THE ROBOTIC RAONIC defeats the veteran to find a place in the final against what could be the BIRDBRAIN BERDYCH.. wow!! what a fantastic Wimbledon one which will forever stay in my memory.

Andy for Christmas sake pleeeeeeeeeeeeez save the Wimbers Title

What a boring Wimbledon that has turned out to be

Well I certainly agree that a Raonic v Berdych Final would be the worst possible news for the ticket touts (outlawed anyway these days ....?) - although now looking a near-certainty for Murray to come through here, so it won't come to pass.

But here's the thing : if Raonic truly is as metronomic/robotic/limited as you (and, in fairness, many others) continue to claim, then how come nobody has stopped him so far in six previous rounds ...??

Frankly lags I wish I could answer that but I cant only to ask what the hell else to we have when you have young ones like Tomic and Kyrgios failing to make any sort of commitment.??? True he has improved considerably but he still fails to light my fire.. he could do with a charisma transplant it might help to convince me. But I do not see him as the saviour of tennis Wink

And if - big IF, I know - he were to take down Andy on Sunday, would you then say that he does - or does not - deserve to be Wimbledon Champion, and given due credit ......even though you may not actually enjoy watching his brand of tennis ......

Frankly lags I wish I could answer that but I cant only to ask what the hell else to we have when you have young ones like Tomic and Kyrgios failing to make any sort of commitment.??? True he has improved considerably but he still fails to light my fire.. he could do with a charisma transplant it might help to convince me. But I do not see him as the saviour of tennis Wink

Last edited by Haddie-nuff on Fri 08 Jul 2016, 9:27 pm; edited 1 time in total

Murray now probably playing some of the best tennis of his life. Got to be favourite against Raonic but probably only a slight favourite, given the Canadian's serve and much-improved all-round play and confidence (Johnny Mac to thank for that?). New ground this, of course, for Raonic and up against the home-town favourite in his 11th GS final (some achievement, even if the Ls outweigh the Ws). Wonder if the emotional as well as the physical strain of beating Fed could count against the Canadian on Sunday.

Raonic has a potent serve and some potent ground shots so should gain confidence in knowing he has that in his locker. He also outpowered Murray for the first set and a half at Queens about three weeks ago. So I think he can cause Murray a lot of damage in the first two sets and if he finds himself two sets up in the match then he should just focus on winning his own serve and go for the break when and if Murray wobbles or gamble on tie-breakers. That's probably what he should do if he wins the first set. Focus on his own serve and pick up the break when Murray wobbles or take it to tie-breakers.

lydian wrote:Thanks Auto, appreciated. The forum seems not the same since the fallout, the lower modding is better but clearly a mark has been left. We'll see if people slowly return.Lord knows how Berdych got this far...he's limited/wooden in game and mind and yet here he is...hard to believe. The only area he's better than Murray is a more attractive partner. Fed really missed his chance as I said earlier at 40-A at 5-6 in the 4th, going back to Raonic rather than easy FH put away to then maybe take him to the TB will haunt him tonight. Suspect that was Fed's last big act in tennis also.

I doubt it.

It's all about his fitness. If he can get his match fitness back and avoid further injuries he'll still good enough to compete at the very top. 2 slam finals and 2 semi finals in your last four outings is as good as anyone other than Djokovic and Murray.

Besides, he was a couple of games away from the W final having hardly played any tennis in the last five months. And make no mistake - this was a very rusty Federer, way off pace. Just the Federer of five months ago would have won this in straight sets.

$64,000 question NSWe can only hope.. it will, Im sure not be for the lack of trying but my fear is we may well have another Delpo scenario.. wrists are notoriously difficult to heal at the best of times and Rafa wont hold back Im sure

As a firm Fed fan (nice the alliteration worked out!), always sad to see him lose - a fantastic effort after a long lay off, but actually desperate to see Murray pull another Wimbledon off and don't think I could have borne (I don't know if that's the correct spelling after very jolly evening - hope makes sense?) to see the two square off. Wouldn't have been a case of not minding who won, but not being able to bear seeing either lose.

Great to see a young gun in a major final (finally!) - well stepped up Milos! However, do hope that, come Sunday evening, Andy Murray's name will, once again, be engraved on the trophy.

There's only a 3.5 year age difference between Murray and Raonic, but I think Raonic with John McEnroe and Carlos Moya in his team (both only brought in recently in 2016), and believing in him, can be a serious force over the next few years.

I like to think Murray is the heavy favorite. Yes Federer is to an extent a much diminished player, but I do feel people are not appreciating the type of performance Raonic had this tournament. I think for him it was very tough to play one of his idols and the living the legend on CC Wimbeldon. Yes he has been around and is a vet but he has never been this far in a slam and to play Roger on a surface that frankly Milos is just really getting comfortable on. Also beating Sam who himself was playing in the form of his life with huge serving but Milos controlled that match and played very well. He came in ranked in the top 8 already and had been having good results, he also is highly professional. I think he will end up being the class of the guys that have come after in the age group of 24-28.

As for Fed, I don't get all the doom and gloom. I never thought he would win 17 and certainly don't think he will get 18 and I think that has been pretty much expected for some time that he was done winning slams. I mean Roger can't be oblivious to how poorly he has done in terms of winning slams in recent years. I think he is smart enough to know he has a chance, but that he is a bit of longshot to do it. He isn't Leicester Long shot. I probably would make a bet if I was getting 4 or 5 to 1 on my money for him winning another slam. A lot of players play an entire career and don't even have that much of a chance. Fed isn't stupid or delusional, he just doesn't like to lose in slams. If I was Fed, I was still like my chances. The guy is playing with house money makes like a million dollar every 6 days, and is worshipped and loved the most of anyone in the history of the modern game. So hell if I was Fed I would want to play even if I was 4, 5, 6, or 10 or more to 1 long shot on winning another slam.

Its like the poker concept of pot odds. Sometimes the smart play is to take the longshot bet and risk all your chips when for example you are short stacked and can't lose very much but if you win you will rake a huge pot. So when the pot odds and chip level call for it even long shots have to be played. That is Fed's situation as well, he is longshot to win a slam, but the payoff in terms of legacy and even additional adoration and glory is so high, what the hell does he have to lose. The big limit on this of course is if his body starts to really break down and he has pain issues and performance issues where he isn't even a doable longshot.

Murray is too primed, and milos won't be able to recover and is just less experienced. Murray in 4 sets in the final despite and improved Milos. Its about time he got lucky enough to play someone not named Novak or Fed in a slam final. Murray continues to make a laughing stock of the accomplishments of the Weak era boys Fed beat up on.

I don't see it as doom & gloom socal - the guy has had a herculean career - just more assessing the reality of the situation with him being 35ish and not many have won slams at this age period.

I hear what you're saying Emancipator and we're agreed on his rustiness - a remarkable achievement...just shows his raw talent as ever. However, I just cant see him getting that 1 more major now. I really hope I'm wrong as would love to see him bow out Sampras-style, his career deserves that book-end but I fear it wont happen as long as younger, fitter, hungry Djoko & Murray are around and going deep. This Wimb felt like his best & last chance for me. But hey, lets see...he has a habit of proving us all wrong with his various renaissances.

Socal, Federer hasn't won a slam in 16 majors now...why would you place 4-1 odds of him winning another one when he's now at an even older age? I think that's highly optimistic.

Agree HN...and it also took Agassi wrist surgery to overcome his injury. Hopefully Rafa/team have caught it early before coming chronic which was Delpo's main problem...he played with it being sore for a long time and ended up badly damaging tendons (tendonosis), rather than mainly the surrounding sheath (tendinitis) which Rafa has. Fingers...no pun intended...crossed because the game still benefits greatly from his presence, as do his fans ;-)

PS. welcome back TP, good to see you posting again. I would like to see Murray win on Sunday as I'm not a fan of Raonic's style of play at all and Andy has been knocking on the year for the past year now...deserves something for his efforts. However, this is such an unpredictable game...being a Rafa fan has solidly taught me that...

Just to add Raonic last played Murray in a Grand Slam in January 2016 at the Australian Open in the semifinal. Murray won in five sets but Raonic won the first and third sets so at one point was leading two sets to one.Murray won it: 4-6 7-5 6-7(4) 6-4 6-2.

Compare this with the recent grass court encounter at Queens with Murray winning 6-7(5) 6-4 6-3 but with Raonic leading 6-7 0-3 at one stage, suggests this is not going to be one way traffic for Murray.

Ps I think a fit Federer would have beaten Raonic comfortably and that was the reason for Federer's post match disappointment. One of the key features of Federer's abilities is an ability to beat the big servers. His record at Wimbledon and the US Open has shown this.

Roger Federer wrote:To be very clear for you, I hope to be back on Centre Court ... It's a dream to win my eighth title here but it's not the only reason why I play tennis ... I know Wimbledon is important, but it's not everything. I have played 10 sets [against Cilic and Raonic]. It's very encouraging for the season. I was insecure coming into Wimbledon.

From BBC Article:Wimbledon 2016: Roger Federer has no intention of retiring after defeathttp://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/36751760

Well, Fed gone. I would have thought he would close it out in four once he was up 2:1, but he did not. Quite bad two back-to-back doubles at 40-15 when he was not even under too much pressure.

I would have loved him to be in the final, plus he lost a match that he probably could have won. But then again, in the QF he won a match that he probably could have (should have?) lost, so on balance not much to complain about.

Also, it would have been great if he had easily disposed of Cilic and Raonic, but given that he was struggling against both of them, he was unlikely to beat Murray anyway. Murray a firm favorite but I think people are underestimating Raonic. I think - given their current respective forms - he may well be a tougher test for Andy than Fed would have been.

Unlike lydian, I am sure I will watch the final (which would probably not have been the case if Andy and Nole had been in the final).

May the best man win. I do not have too much preference between the two, though I expect I may end up rooting for Raonic - unless he plays glued to the baseline.

Nore Staat wrote:Just to add Raonic last played Murray in a Grand Slam in January 2016 at the Australian Open in the semifinal. Murray won in five sets but Raonic won the first and third sets so at one point was leading two sets to one.Murray won it: 4-6 7-5 6-7(4) 6-4 6-2.

In fact, Raonic was up two sets to one, and on serve in the fourth when he got injured and only lost the match after that.